Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has launched a fierce defense of state authority over artificial intelligence regulation — positioning Florida as a central battleground in a growing dispute with the federal government. DeSantis insists that Florida has the constitutional right to craft its own AI laws, even if they conflict with President Trump’s recent executive order aimed at creating a single national AI framework.
At a public forum in Jupiter, Florida, the governor outlined plans for a “Citizen Bill of Rights for Artificial Intelligence” — a sweeping policy proposal that would impose privacy protections, parental controls, data safeguards, and limits on AI use of a person’s name, image, or likeness without consent. Floridians would also see enhanced notification requirements when interacting with AI systems and restrictions on AI being used as licensed therapy or counseling.
DeSantis’ plan goes beyond abstract ideas. It also seeks to ban utilities from shifting the costs of massive AI data centers onto residents and gives local governments authority to reject such facilities within their jurisdictions.
The confrontation between Florida and federal policymakers intensified when President Donald Trump signed an executive order designed to curb state AI regulations, arguing that too many differing state laws could hinder innovation and U.S. global leadership in AI. The order also envisages federal agencies — such as the Department of Justice — challenging state laws it views as conflicting with a national framework.
Trump’s approach drew backing from major AI companies and Silicon Valley investors seeking a uniform regulatory environment to minimize compliance burdens across 50 state jurisdictions. Critics, however, warn that it undermines states’ rights and consumer protections championed by local lawmakers and advocacy groups.
DeSantis fired back, telling Floridians and journalists that an executive order cannot legally preempt state regulatory power — only Congress can do so through legislation. He argues that Florida’s AI regulations fall within the constitutional authority of states under the 10th Amendment, and he said he’s confident Florida would prevail in any legal challenge.
The proposed AI Bill of Rights is one of the most comprehensive state‑level AI regulatory frameworks in the U.S. — and one of the most politically charged. Its core protections would include:
-
Requiring explicit permission before AI uses someone’s name, image, or likeness.
-
Data privacy protections to secure personal information input into AI systems.
-
Parental controls allowing parents to monitor their children’s interactions with AI platforms.
-
Transparency mandates for companies using AI chatbots.
-
Protections against unregulated “licensed” AI therapy or counseling.
Proponents say these measures are necessary to prevent AI harms including misinformation, privacy abuse, exploitation of minors, and financial or social discrimination. However, some tech industry groups argue that too many local rules could fragment the market and slow innovation — a key concern cited by the federal administration.
The clash over AI regulation is not just a technical debate — it reflects a larger ideological divide over the balance of federal and state power in technology policy. Republican governors like DeSantis, as well as Arkansas’s Sarah Huckabee Sanders, have pushed back against federal preemption, framing state laws as necessary “guardrails” that protect citizens from unregulated technological harms.
Opponents of the federal executive order — including both Republican and Democratic lawmakers — say the White House’s efforts to curb state regulation threaten states’ rights and democratic accountability. A group of more than 280 state legislators recently penned a letter opposing federal limits on AI laws, arguing that states must retain authority to act in the best interests of their citizens. Meanwhile, legal analysts and advocacy groups warn that the federal push to override state AI rules may face court challenges. Prior attempts to use constitutional provisions to block technology regulations — such as state privacy laws — have encountered judicial skepticism, especially under the dormant Commerce Clause doctrine.
With both sides standing their ground, the battle over AI regulation could soon move from press conferences and social media to the courtroom. Experts suggest that legal challenges to Trump’s executive order could test the limits of federal authority over emerging technologies and state sovereignty.
At the same time, many analysts believe that the ultimate solution will likely involve Congress — not the White House alone — debating, drafting, and enacting a national AI law that reconciles federal leadership with state‑level innovation and protections.
Until then, Florida’s move serves as a bold — and controversial — test case in how states assert control over cutting‑edge technologies. Whether other states follow Florida’s lead or courts curb the state’s ambitions, the outcome could ripple far beyond Tallahassee, affecting AI governance across the United States and shaping how society grapples with the promises and perils of artificial intelligence.
Leave a Reply